Re: [KOML] KO items on eBay items

[Mel Brown <melbrown@eatel.net>]

"Carl Wegerer, III" wrote:

> First, I would like to thank everyone for providing me with information and
> suggestions over the past year.  I just could not make my Koni-Omega work
> for portraiture - I was either too close or too far away from my subjects.
> I am now off to try to a Rolleiflex 2.8C (if anyone has insight to using a
> Rolleiflex, I would appreciate the help).

Carl, have you already purhcased the Rollei? If not, you may want to consider
other possibilities. I have a Rollei 2.8F, and at closest focus, the viewfinder
displays a field about 21.5" wide. That may be small enough for you, but other
cameras can do better. My Mamiya RB67, with a 90mm lens, gets the field width
down to about 4" with its bellows racked fully out. A Rollei SL-66 also has a
bellows and should be able to get in about as close. So do the Mamiya C series
bodies. All those cameras offer interchangeable lenses, and may better fit your
needs for portraiture.

Also, I wonder whether the Rollei 2.8C has parallax compensation. You can find
out easily enough by holding it up close to something bright, like your computer
monitor. As you focus closer, a black bar should intrude into the top of the
image area and simultaneously retreat from the bottom of the image.

Pricewise, a Mamiya C series will probably beat out the others, but beware of
the unrepairable shutters in the chrome lenses. Same goes for the non-green C
lenses for the RB67. I shopped carefully for my RB67, and got it with a 90 C
lens, prism, a 220 back and a Polaroid back for less than $600. Unlike the Koni
backs, 120 film works just fine in the 220 back. Its only drawback is that I
have to remember to cock the shutter AND wind the film for each shot. The RB67
Pro S takes care of that problem, but naturally they cost more.

By the way, getting a 135mm for your Koni wouldn't have helped at all. It can't
focus as close as the 90mm, so its minimum field width is about the same. I like
my Konis, but if they had given them decent close-focusing, they would be hard
to beat in any category!

Regards,

Mel